Women students tell president about hurdles in graduate school

By Rebecca A. Doyle

President James J. Duderstadt compared his
Michigan Agenda for Women to the Michigan Mandate last week, noting that
the key to the success of the mandate is changing not simply the
composition of the institution, but changing the way the institution
functioned. The key to it is changing the University in a very fundamental
way.

Duderstadt addressed a group of more than 35 women
graduate students, but after a few words of background, he spent most of
the hour fielding questions and asking for suggestions and direction from
students about the issues facing women in graduate school.

The vision that was put out for the Womens Agenda was that
the Univer-sity of Michigan, by the year 2,000, would become the leader
among American universities in promoting the success among women of
diverse backgrounds as faculty, students and staff, Duderstadt
said.

It is very much a grass-roots effort. I want to listen
as much as respond. What issues at the University are important to you?
Where do you think that institutions like this need to change so that you
can better pursue your own particular objectives?

Women
responded by talking about the Old Boy network and the lack of
mentorship for women, financial aid for out-of-state graduate students,
the lack of reward for faculty who are willing to spend time with women
graduate students, the lack of funding for women who cannot attend
graduate school full-time, and issues of sexual harassment.

Duderstadt responded to a remark about the Old Boys network
and the way women graduate students are treated differently than men by
saying that he had heard similar comments from women staff members.

In our particular case, graduate education still has a certain
feudal character to it, he said. You treat your own graduate
students in the same way that you remember you were treated, and so it
passes down from generation to generation.

I really do
believe there needs to be broader discussion between students and faculty
and among the faculty themselves to set certain standards for graduate
student treatment.

Several students agreed that faculty who
are not rewarded by their departments for their work with graduate
students were not willing to spend time doing it. Faculty across the
University should be equally rewarded for their participation with
graduate students, they noted.

Its particularly
difficult when the faculty member really doesnt have very much
experience in how to handle the relationship, Duderstadt noted. He
cited a program at Cornell University in which graduate students in
interdisciplinary fields of study are assigned to a committee that
supervises the students progress from the beginning. It has
been very successful, he said, adding that the Cornell model had
also significantly reduced the time-to-degree.

He also noted that
it is becoming more common for graduate students to attend part-time.

Its something we ought to look at. What were finding
is that the number of students that have the opportunity to spend 100
percent of their time in graduate education is declining, Duderstadt
said.

The ultimate responsibility for the progress of graduate
students should rest with the faculty and the department chairs, he said,
and advocated a system that would track that progress and report it. The
ultimate responsibility rests with the department chairs, he asserted.

Several in the audience said that sometimes the department chair is the
worst offender.

Replace them, Duderstadt said.
This is perhaps the most important responsibility a department chair
has. Department chairs can be changed; tenured faculty
cant.